W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > January 2003

Re: Rationalizing the term URI

From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 20:28:08 +0000
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20030123202707.038b10b0@127.0.0.1>
To: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
Cc: <uri@w3.org>

I think I should have known this.  Thanks for the explanation.

#g
--

At 10:27 AM 1/23/03 -0500, Tim Berners-Lee wrote:


>On Thursday, Jan 23, 2003, at 10:28 US/Eastern, Graham Klyne wrote:
>
>>At 08:24 AM 1/23/03 -0500, Tim Berners-Lee wrote:
>>>     rel(u, base)      and abs(u, bae)
>>>
>>>and to point out that you can use abs(rel(u, base), base) for u in all
>>>circumstances.
>>
>>All?
>>
>>    base= http://www.w3.org/
>>    u=    http://mmm.m3.net/xyz
>>
>>What, then, is rel(u,base)?
>
>//mmm.m3.net/xyz
>
>Note there is more than one rel(,) function, as sometimes there are choices.
>When two URIs share nothing of the path, then a root-relative URI
>or a base-relative URIs are optional ways of expressing.
>
>A lot of systems would not bother in your case to save the 5 characters.
>In some cases rel(a, base) = a


-------------------
Graham Klyne
<GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Friday, 24 January 2003 09:35:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 13 January 2011 12:15:31 GMT